Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals 08-20-2025

AI Generated Transcript

AI Disclaimer: Summaries and transcripts above were created by various AI tools. By their nature, these tools will produce mistakes and inaccuraies. Links to the official meeting recordings are provided for verification. If you find an error, please report it to somervillecivicpulse at gmail dot com.

Meeting Title: Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals 08-20-2025
City: Somerville, MA
Date Published: 2025-09-12

Back to all meetings
View Official Recording
View Summary

AI Disclaimer: Summaries and transcripts above were created by various AI tools. By their nature, these tools will produce mistakes and inaccuraies. Links to the official meeting recordings are provided for verification. If you find an error, please report it to somervillecivicpulse at gmail dot com.

Time & Speaker	Transcript
SPEAKER_01	good evening ladies and gentlemen i'd like to welcome you to the city of somerville zoning board of appeals meeting fall wednesday august the 20th 2025. it's just 601. uh joining us tonight on the board will be brian cook he's going to be our acting clerk ann fullerton zach zaremba Sisia Daglian and I am your chair or slow Susan fontana staff supporting us will be kit luster Madison Anthony and Christian had to know will be in the background. helping us out so uh let me see we have the uh first on the agenda oh let me read the statement here pursuant to chapter two of the acts of 2025 this meeting of the somerville zoning board of appeals will be conducted via remote participation A video recording of these proceedings will be available on the city website, the city's website, meetings and events page, or by emailing zoningboard at Somerville. Gov. Tonight, under general business, clerk will take over. We have some minutes to approve. Mr. Cook.
SPEAKER_11	Yes, Madam Chair. I move to approve the minutes for the July 16, 2025, and the August 6, 2025 Zoning Board of Appeals meetings.
SPEAKER_01	As presented, anybody have any comments? Everything OK? May I have a second, please, on the motion? Second. Seconded by Sisia Daglian. All in favor, as we go around, please say aye. Sisia daglian aye ann fullerton aye zach zaremba brian cook aye and susan fontano aye let the record show all voting members voted the affirmative they will carry next on the general business is the draw seven park uh signature we have presentation on that Who's gonna be handling that?
SPEAKER_05	Here Fontana, this is Kit. I've just promoted Devin Herrick to panelist and Devin, you should be able to unmute and tell us about your project.
SPEAKER_04	Excellent. Are you all able to hear me clearly?
SPEAKER_01	Yes, there you are. We see you as well, which is nice. Wonderful.
SPEAKER_04	If I may, would you mind if I share my screen just so you have a little visual up in front of you?
SPEAKER_01	Yes, please do.
SPEAKER_04	All right, great.
SPEAKER_01	We love show and tell.
SPEAKER_04	Just give me one moment. Let me see if I can manage this. Let's see. I'm afraid the host has disabled screen sharing. If we're able to enable it, great. If not, I can certainly just start with a brief introduction.
SPEAKER_05	This is Kate. You should be able to try now.
SPEAKER_04	All right, let me give it a whirl. Oh, that looks so promising. All right, let's see here. All right, I'm hoping that you might be able to see the plan sheet right in front of me.
SPEAKER_01	Yeah.
SPEAKER_04	Oh, excellent. All right. Thank you so much. So my name is Devon Herrick. I am a wetland scientist with Weston and Sampson. I'm here today to speak with you about the Draw 7 Park project. We've recently undergone quite an extensive permitting process, and this project is underway. I will say that I'm an environmental permitter, so I'm afraid if you have design questions, I may not be able to answer them, but I will certainly do my darndest to answer any questions that you may have. um to give you a little orientation the draw seven park is located right next to assembly row and it is adjacent to the amelia earhart dam if you're familiar with that it is located right where my cursor is Plans to improve this park include updated site amenities, utilities, pedestrian connectivity. The project's also looking to address some flooding issues with the river systems that are located adjacent. This will include the development of a flood barrier that's through a natural berm, as well as creation of a living shoreline to mitigate some of the riverbank erosion that's occurring on that park's eastern side. and in general just the project is serving to increase community access with the goal of connection to the mystic river reservation greenway from an environmental perspective the site is quite interesting because it is at the confluence of title and non-title resources on the downstream side of the dam we've got title resources and upstream non-title uh when it's completed so right now what you see in front of you is the existing conditions in the park um so it's basically wide open space you may be familiar with the fishing pier that's present that will remain it's actually going to be improved upon and there's a small parking area So let me see if I can shift. This is what the proposed conditions are due to look like. So we're looking at a variety of open lawn spaces, flexible seating, accessible pathways, shade structure, improved parking facilities, a very extensive planting plan, which I can show you on this page here. And like I said, those improvements to the shoreline and the fishing pier. So the reason I'm before you here today is the last permit that we have from an environmental perspective is what's called Chapter 91. For folks that may be not so familiar with this particular permit, Chapter 91 is known as the Public Waterfront Act. It's one of the oldest pieces of environmental legislation in the country. And they particularly protect, in this case, filled tidelands and flowed tidelands. So the Mystic River adjacent to the site is a flowed tideland, meaning subject to tidal action. And part of this project is seeking to do beach cleanup and beach nourishment. So on the beach right now, there's debris in the form of bricks, glass, concrete. things along those lines. So what we're looking to do is get that cleaned up and then come back and augment the entirety of the beach area with a matching grain size material. So it's beach nourishment. We're just kind of going to be adding a thin layer of material, maximum of three inches deep, just to make the area smooth and to make sure that it's accessible for everyone. We're looking at adding approximately 397 cubic yards of material. So as part of this chapter 91 process, we need both a planning signature and a zoning signature. It's just kind of part of the standard process, just indicating that you're aware of the project and understand what's going on. Planning was kind enough to have us at their latest meeting. And so now I'm here before you and I would be happy to do my darndest to answer any questions that you may have about the project.
SPEAKER_01	JoAnne Hanrahan, All right, I have a quick question how long is this project going to take a guesstimate.
SPEAKER_04	Karen Hollweg, yeah absolutely I don't have the construction timeline in front of me, I know that they've already started, I believe they're looking to wrap up within the year so it's supposed to be quite quick.
SPEAKER_01	JoAnne Hanrahan, Okay, thank you.
SPEAKER_04	Yes.
SPEAKER_01	JoAnne Hanrahan, Anybody else raise your hand. JoAnne Hanrahan, CC yeah.
SPEAKER_08	What are those oval areas? Can you just describe some of the amenity?
SPEAKER_04	Let me zoom in for you a little bit. Oh, goodness. If my screen wasn't frozen. All right. Well, let me do my darndest for you. So if we are looking here on the left hand side of the screen, as you enter, we're going to have a newly configured parking area. with some nice wide accessible pathways. There's gonna be a seating area here with a nice shade structure. Those pathways will continue including pathways along the water to increase waterfront kind of access. And so people can be looking at the really lovely view that you folks have. Improved access up to this fishing pier. The fishing pier will stay the same in the same configuration, but access to the pier will be improved. This giant oval is a large circular lawn space, and it's surrounded by some of these lighter gray areas that you may be able to see are more like naturalized plantings, a little bit longer grass. It's supposed to be a bit more natural areas as opposed to manicured lawn, which is more of what we're looking at in this oval. Those pathways continue up to this circular pathway here and another circular pathway here before connecting offsite into that existing pathway that you already have.
SPEAKER_01	Thank you.
SPEAKER_04	Absolutely.
SPEAKER_01	Brian are in? No? Okay. Well, I think it's exciting whenever we can preserve, you know, a natural site like this, especially here in the city. I live down in this end of the city, so I'm familiar with the waterways down there and stuff. And I'm so happy to see that because you see deterioration over the years and, you know, it breaks your heart. So I'm glad to see it. Thank you.
SPEAKER_04	Thank you. We're looking forward to it.
SPEAKER_01	Good.
SPEAKER_04	so what's our next step what do we have to do uh a signature page has been sent along so as long as the zoning board is in concurrence i just need one representative of zoning to sign it um i i don't it doesn't have to be any person in particular or anyone that you designate if you have an admin that is certainly fine too okay so we vote on this tonight
SPEAKER_01	And we'll sign the papers at the office. I'll talk to well, we should have a motion to approve the presentation. And then we'll go from there. So we could ask our acting clerk to make a motion, and then we'll have somebody second it, please.
SPEAKER_11	Thank you, Madam Chair. I move to approve a signature from the Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals. for Chapter 91 approval for Draw 7 Park improvements to facilitate the Department of Conservation and Recreation permitting process with the Department of Environmental Protection.
SPEAKER_01	Thank you, Brian. May I have a second, please?
SPEAKER_09	Seconded.
SPEAKER_01	Seconded by Zach Zaremba. All in favor, please say aye as we go around. Sisia Daglian?
SPEAKER_08	Aye.
SPEAKER_01	Ann Fullerton? Aye. Zach Zaremba.
SPEAKER_02	Aye.
SPEAKER_01	Brian Cook.
SPEAKER_02	Aye.
SPEAKER_01	And Susan Fontano, aye. Let the record show all five voting members voted in the affirmative. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation. And Kit, I'll get in touch with you and see when I can sign that for you. Yeah, that sounds great. We can be in touch. Okay.
SPEAKER_04	Appreciate your time. Thank you so much.
SPEAKER_01	Thank you as well. Have a good night.
SPEAKER_04	To you as well.
SPEAKER_01	Marguerite McLaughlin, All righty so next on the agenda. Marguerite McLaughlin, Where am I here we're going to jump down to. Marguerite McLaughlin, 872 broadway please Mr Clark.
SPEAKER_11	yes madam chair um i would like to open 872 broadway which consists of zp25-000064 872 broadway llc seeks relief from sco section 2.4 0.3, 0.d, 0.5 to allow mechanical equipment in the frontage area of a lot, which requires a hardship variance. And ZP25-000065 Brian G McAdoo, 872 broadway llc seeks relief from seo section 4.1 point seven point D ground story primary facade fenestration requirement for a general building in the mid rise three zoning district, which requires a hardship variance.
SPEAKER_01	JoAnne Hanrahan, Thank you, Brian and so we're also now, I understand that there's a request for a continuance. So would you make that motion, please?
SPEAKER_11	Yes, Madam Chair. I move to approve the request for a continuance to the September 17, 2025 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting for 872 Broadway.
SPEAKER_01	Second, please, on the request for a continuance.
SPEAKER_09	Second, Susan.
SPEAKER_01	Zach Zaremba, all in favor, please say aye as we go around. Ann Fullerton? Aye. Zach Zaremba.
SPEAKER_02	Aye.
SPEAKER_01	Sisia Daglian. Aye. Brian Cook.
SPEAKER_02	Aye.
SPEAKER_01	And Ursula Susan Fontano. Aye. Let the record show that 872 Broadway has been open and continued until September 17, 2025. Thank you. And now we'll move on to, under the public hearings as well, to 8 Melvin Street. This was continued since July 16, 2025. Uh, is Madison here and the applicants.
SPEAKER_07	I'm here chair.
SPEAKER_01	Hello, how are you doing tonight? I'm good. How are you? Very good. So welcome and we ready to go on this now.
SPEAKER_07	Hopefully, as long as the applicants are here. Yeah.
SPEAKER_10	Rob Passione, Hi, there he is. Rob Passione, i'm rob passione i'm the architect that had presented last meeting. Rob Passione, And the owner was up there, yes. Rob Passione, said deal was a order, so he just got on. Rob Passione, So if I could share my screen i'll kind of walk the board through what what updates we've made get your opinions on what you guys think.
SPEAKER_01	Okay, though we're ready.
SPEAKER_10	Rob Passione, Alright, so um. Let me share my PDF here so everyone can see that. So just to quickly recap, What we had submitted last time was a dormer at this kitchen area here on the third floor of the building. It's a 16 foot wide dorm which had three zoning code violations. The feedback we got from the board was that this configuration would not be approved. So we went back And we discussed it and we had our contractor come down to the site to take a look at it to see what we could do to try to modify it and kind of what the steps would be to make that happen. So what we're proposing tonight for the board's consideration is to shift the dormer wall on this side, so in the plan on the left side, over 35 inches, which would essentially drop the dormer width down to 13 foot 1 inches from 16 foot. The original approved drawings had it at 11 foot 7, so it's 1 foot 6 above where it was originally approved. Hal Hallstein, So what we would do is essentially slide this wall over we'd have to you know basically modify all of these cabinets here modified the side of the kitchen island. Hal Hallstein, But we would propose for the board's consideration to keep the windows, where they are so basically push it over as far as we could to the to get as close as we could to the existing windows that are in the door now um. One thing we did note that when we resubmitted the paperwork that the 50% of the dormer ridge, the new dormer is not going over 50% of the total dormer ridge length. We actually believe we meet that requirement now by sliding this over 35 inches. But the other two items that we are still in violation of would be the dormer separation, which went from 1 foot 11 inches to 4 foot 10 inches. We're still over on that one. And then the the window ratio with the solid wall being over 36 inches. So we're a bit over on that as well. But hopefully, this improves the situation. And happy to answer any questions or hear what you guys think.
SPEAKER_01	Does anybody? First of all, is there anybody from the public here?
SPEAKER_05	Kit? This is Kit. If you'd like to speak about this application, please raise your hand. We can allow you to speak. We've got one person. Yep, looks like we have one person with their hand raised. Madison, could I ask you to share the timer? Just wait a second while Madison gets the timer up.
SPEAKER_01	Yep, take your time.
SPEAKER_05	OK, I will allow my reporter to speak. If you could just state your name and address for the record, that would be wonderful and you'll have two minutes.
SPEAKER_00	You should be able to unmute. Oh, there we go. I haven't looked at this project in detail, but I'm just curious about how this might meet the first condition for a hardship variance after looking at the analysis in the staff report regarding that as to whether there's some compelling condition relating to the building um and how it could be that um it would be necessary to to um construct this in this way so that's about all I have to say I'm just curious thanks thank you Madison um
SPEAKER_07	Would you like me to respond to this question for this? Yes. Yeah. I don't believe that it fits the criteria for a hardship variance.
SPEAKER_01	See on the recommendation, Mr. Porter, the recommendation from the staff person was no change in the last meeting. The July 10, 25 was to deny. So you see that Karen Hollweg, And how, how would you explain that to him as the planner.
SPEAKER_07	Karen Hollweg, um I just I don't believe there's anything about the site that gives it special circumstances that would make this project qualify for a hardship.
SPEAKER_01	Thank you. Karen Hollweg, Okay, is there anybody else, as we go on we're going to address these questions as well. Is there anybody else from the public that has raised their hand and like to speak? Have a question?
SPEAKER_05	Chair Fontana, this is Kit. There's no one else in the attendees section currently.
SPEAKER_01	Okay. So we'll put a pause on the public portion for a few minutes and we'll bring it up to the board. JoAnne Hanrahan, Has the bullet does anybody on the board see any improvement or change from the last meeting and the last. JoAnne Hanrahan, Of what they had done to what they're planning on doing. JoAnne Hanrahan, You know what I think we need to connect my screen back Robert.
SPEAKER_10	yeah.
SPEAKER_01	JoAnne Hanrahan, Joanne. Okay. Hi, Ian Fullerton, please.
SPEAKER_06	Thank you, Madam Chair. I certainly see change in the modification that they're requesting removes one of the hardship requests. So that is a substantial change. Um, I think the, the resident question, um, Mr. Porter's question is, is meaningful though. I think we all were struggling with the first criteria in the initial meeting. And, um, I think we, I continue to struggle with that criteria that said, Karen Hollweg, This board has in the past, worked in good faith with residents to try to. Karen Hollweg, to manage. Karen Hollweg, errors like this. Karen Hollweg, When the resident is willing to make changes.
SPEAKER_01	Okay. Karen Hollweg, anybody else. Ann Osborn, Zach Zaremba please.
SPEAKER_09	Zach Zaremba, yeah I agree with and on this. Zach Zaremba, Unless the architects on the board disagree with me, it looks like they've made some significant changes since the last meeting and they're acting in good faith to work with us so i'd like to try and make it work for them.
SPEAKER_01	Ann Osborn, Okay. Ann Osborn, um um I believe it up, I always had the pleasure of the board, I just have one comment. It's kind of like a little commercial break here. We've got to figure out how we get the word out there to these people, whether it be a small person that wants to buy something and flip it and do it over, and then we work with the contractors or the architects. and they take things upon themselves or they walk away from something and everybody does their own thing and then they come back and it's like oops we made a mistake um we're i always say we're not here to say no we want people to improve their properties and prosper and businesses and for residential or business but you know we've got to really start really taking a look at these things, because as we go down the road, it's not fair to other people who really play by the rules and would never think of doing such a thing like this. They would have done it right from the beginning, not to have to go and hear it out and what have you. So having said that, I would have thought they would have gone JoAnne Hanrahan, Try and been smaller. JoAnne Hanrahan, I try to modify it a little better. JoAnne Hanrahan, anybody else have anything to say. JoAnne Hanrahan, As the architect. JoAnne Hanrahan, have anything to say.
SPEAKER_10	Um, I mean, we, you know, the reason we made it the size we did was to, you know, try to minimize as best we could. Obviously there's still a big disturbance to the kitchen, but still kind of make the island work and keep the windows where they were. Um, and the contractor thought that was kind of the best dimension for him to, to manipulate things. So that, that was kind of why we landed where we did. Okay. Um, so.
SPEAKER_01	And now who am I, who am I looking at here? uh central kuma who is that yes are you the homeowner yes i am you were the gentleman here last time as well yes yes oh okay because you look very different to me maybe it's the hat or something okay any other questions or comments from the board brian uh i think Sisia had a question or a comment so i'll i'm sorry first Sisia i apologize
SPEAKER_08	I think that the sort of unbalanced windows look really odd. I would at least get rid of the left-hand one. I feel like the project overall is pretty close to being compliant. So I really struggle with approving what's before us. I think the last time when we were looking at the building sections of the kitchen, It seemed like the fridge could actually tuck under the existing roof. I'm not sure why the dorm can't get more, can't slim up even more other than perhaps it's going to affect the dimension of the island. You're already there doing all this work. having the windows be conforming is not, I mean, everything is extra work at this point, but it's not unreasonable to ask that at least that be conforming.
SPEAKER_01	So, excuse me, could you reiterate, what are you saying you would like, your suggestion would be to drop?
SPEAKER_08	I mean, yes, to have Well, it was really two suggestions. One is to drop the left-hand window and make the window dimension relative to the face of the facade be conforming. So that's one thing. And I think it seems like the dormer width is what, one foot eight wider than it needs to be, or one foot six. It's not, it just seems like, If you're there tearing things up, you could make the whole thing conforming. It would have impact to, you know, the kitchen a little bit, but or perhaps to the island. But I know. That one variance, you know, I would consider, but even though it's not really cause for a variance, but I think the windows could be made conforming.
SPEAKER_01	Thank you, Brian. Did you want to follow up on something?
SPEAKER_11	Thank you, Madam Chair. Since the two hardship variances that remain are for the dormer face with and the dormer separation standards, if more adjustments can't be made to bring those into further, closer to compliance, I don't know what to do. As it is, it's really hard to stretch criterion one and criterion two of the hardship variance criteria to fit a situation like this. I mean, we have the discretion. We can do a lot with those. criteria but this is essentially trying to create a justification based on a set of decisions that were made that have nothing to do really with i mean there is some uh there are some remarks in the applicant's submission to suggest that it was the nature of the building itself that forced the design of the dormers in order to allow there to be a kitchen for there to be a full third floor apartment um i mean i If that then leads to a zoning violation, I don't think that's something that we can reasonably respond to. It's unfortunate that you have a building with a steep slope in the roof and that you have to raise it with the dormer in order to get a third floor apartment in there with a kitchen. um but that's really a problem of design and not a problem of zoning and if you can't meet the zoning requirements too we're stuck I mean we really are faced with this and cystic was all done this is you know this is as built that needs to be some um reconstruction um I'm having a hard time accepting what the cry the findings for the criteria would be I agree with criteria three that there's really no uh significant detriment to the neighborhood the public good the zoning ordinance for this but the other two I have a hard time finding the language in the findings that will make it
SPEAKER_01	palatable to the board's uh positive vote thank you so um heaven said that um does the architect or the uh applicant have something they'd like to add I mean we you know go ahead and tell
SPEAKER_03	Well, like I explained in the last meeting, a lot of this construction happened during the COVID times and it was difficult to oversee this project. And it's definitely, I was a novice in this project. I should have done better. No question about that. But in all good faith, we did go back and work on this and without Totally taking out the kitchen and you know and moving it back to the other side, because in the original plans we have done everything we can to. You know, to comply, we in fact got one hardship variance removed, and we have only two remaining and even there the variance we are seeking on the dumb with this been reduced issue has been reduced. I don't know what more we can do to keep the kitchen where it is and go forward. I've been struggling with this. For one year, I've been stuck in this situation, not being able to sell unit two or unit three and not being able to make any progress. It is definitely hurting me financially tremendously. So that's all I have to say. And Rob had something else he wanted to share.
SPEAKER_10	Yeah. So I understand what you guys are saying about the site conditions obviously are not really a factor here. Our way of trying to address that was to say the existing structure, it was difficult to put a kitchen up there. And we had originally designed it where there was the The headroom issue so that the contractor had took it upon himself to switch it to the other side and in order to get a what we would call market rate kitchen in there. That is why they made the dormer as big as they did now we're obviously shrinking it down. So when you get a small kitchen, but the justification for was to say hey, this is, you know, to meet kind of the standards of the neighborhood of what we would expect in Somerville for a third floor unit. Hal Hallstein, We thought that the dormer needed to be this this this big so that was kind of a hardship justification so. Hal Hallstein, I know that's probably a little more out of the box and you guys used to hearing you know I know say conditions is a common common thing that comes up with archie but that was kind of what we tried to lay out in our in our findings so.
SPEAKER_11	uh Madam chair may I respond yes please Brian it's not only the site conditions we do take into account unusual structural features um as part of the possibility for the first criterion um But I'm not sure I'm convinced by the rationale you've provided, but I'd like to hear from other members of the board about that rationale, which is it would have been impossible to build a market rate third floor apartment, even though it's allowed by the by the zoning ordinance to add that third apartment but to comply with other zoning ordinance requirements it would have been not financially feasible to put in an apartment there But that was a decision that the owner and then the original architect, perhaps, and then the contractor made. And you're asking us to create a justification, which is that there was something wrong with the structure that justifies the hardship variance. So that's what we're wrestling with. And maybe other members of the board are less uncomfortable with it than I am.
SPEAKER_01	Ann Fullerton and Zach.
SPEAKER_06	Thanks, Madam Chair. Mr. Passione, do you have a picture of the existing kitchen, the refrigerator wall that you can show us?
SPEAKER_10	The original or the way it is right now?
SPEAKER_06	The way it is now.
SPEAKER_10	Yeah, I think so. Hold on. If I can share again. Oh, sorry. That's my... Different kitchen. Yeah. I clicked on the folder. So let me just scroll through here real quick. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, That's the, I don't know if I have a full shot of it. Did you need to see a little bit more No, that's helpful enough PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Okay, so yeah, it does stick out quite a bit past the PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Basement cabinets essentially a full size fridge, not a countertop fridge.
SPEAKER_06	Exactly. So, PB, Harmon Zuckerman, I, I apologize because this is going to come off as Monday morning quarterbacking, but I do think there is a path that is possible. With the existing kitchen where it is, meaning with the sink in its existing place, the dishwasher in its existing place, and the range in its existing place, by just eliminating the cabinetry on the refrigerator wall, and potentially, as member Deglan suggested, tucking the refrigerator into the eave so it would just have drywall next to it. It's certainly not ideal, and you'd have to relocate windows possibly put the the division the mold division between windows on the center of the sink to to make it so you don't need uh a um a variance for the window reusing those window units so you don't need a variance for the window dimension over the 12 foot dormer so I have a hard time supporting the set of hardship variances for all the same reasons everybody's been talking about. And what's also happening in the back of my mind is I can imagine a path where you can make a 12-foot dormer work for this kitchen. It's certainly not as generous as you had in whoever had originally laid it out had envisioned. But I would have a hard time supporting these variances because of that.
SPEAKER_01	And I think Zach, you can leave the pictures up there, Robert. Zach had his hand up. Would you like to add something to the conversation, Zach?
SPEAKER_09	Yes, it would help me reading through the memos, the narratives. If the applicants and architect could perhaps Make more clear just reiterate why you believe the first condition should be satisfied. What makes the lot order building irregular or different or anything else that can sort of help justify that first criteria. Because it's kind of on you guys to come up with a not for us. So I'm not super clear. I think we just hope for the record if you stated that, since that's important.
SPEAKER_10	OK, yeah, we can try to come up with a clear justification. are you thinking about something or i'm sorry you expecting me to respond yes yeah Sorry, I apologize. We'll have to go back and look at it and probably draw some sections or something. Yeah, I didn't expect you to ask me to respond right now to that.
SPEAKER_09	Sorry, go ahead.
SPEAKER_11	No, no. all right maybe I'll take a shot so well it's in your it's in your narrative it's in your narrative yeah the steep slope of the roof required the dormers and in order to accommodate a market rate kitchen in a third floor that is allowed by zoning in this zoning district um that you had to design the dorm as a particular way and you presented original plans that were approved for that and there were no zoning violations so you can understand why the zoning violations are a result of decisions that were made that had nothing to do with even the structure per se because the contractor said oh i got to move it over here because the plans don't allow for enough headroom for the original design of the kitchen uh and now you're claiming that it's a structural it's it's a result of something unique or unusual about the structure being sloped roof so that's where we're stuck yeah so so yeah the reason i was i was thinking was that um i think we we need to prove to you guys that it's unique um unusual unusual condition and that's where maybe the gap is is right now you have a picture of the existing
SPEAKER_10	Robert Underwood Jr. : Outside. Robert Underwood Jr. : Of the outside. Robert Underwood Jr. : Yes, um I do not have that now so unfortunately I don't know since if you have that by chance. Robert Underwood Jr. : No, I don't have. Robert Underwood Jr. : Okay, I just came on the project, when it was you know halfway through.
SPEAKER_01	Cindy Spence, No, no, we understand that Robert.
SPEAKER_11	Robert Underwood Jr. : So exterior pictures that would might reinforce the. argument you wanna make about criterion one and something unusual about the structure that necessitated these changes that then resulted in a zoning violation for the dormers might help get us over the hump along with some adjustments as are being suggested by other members of the board.
SPEAKER_10	Okay, yeah, yeah, that's that's what we're going to go back and try to brainstorm and give you guys maybe some more documentation that shows that. So. Okay, I understood.
SPEAKER_01	Yeah. If you're going to go back and look at that, what like. Ryan just said, or Zach would like a picture. Of the outside and a picture on the inside, so we can see. How they interchange with each other. JoAnne Hanrahan, To give us an idea of maybe if you modify something inside or modify outside. JoAnne Hanrahan, And I think that's what in was looking at with the refrigerator yes and. JoAnne Hanrahan, correct Madam sure that would you kind of like look inside the kitchen, how could you rearrange this if you had to lose another window here and have two windows with the existing shed dormer that's already there, the other dormer and. How can you fix the kitchen or move something that's movable? You know, the sinks in place, you know, the stove maybe is in place.
SPEAKER_10	Yeah. Okay. Yeah.
SPEAKER_01	So we're looking, you know, we're looking to not say no tonight to if you'd like to request a continuance to come back. I mean, I know it's time and back and forth and back and forth, but JoAnne Hanrahan, Right now, the way it is I don't think the majority, you need four votes to have this carry and I don't think you guys have four votes tonight. JoAnne Hanrahan, So rather than say no we're asking to go back and maybe understand more what we're looking for to make it happen. JoAnne Hanrahan, or anybody in the board of anything to say, did I say that properly. JoAnne Hanrahan, All right. You know, take some pictures inside, take some pictures outside. How can we modify inside to make outside right? That's what you have to do at this point. It's not what the outside, you got to make the outside right. That's it. So how can you modify that to the best of your ability and have a nice kitchen and have a serviceable working kitchen?
SPEAKER_11	Dave Kuntz, Okay yeah if I may add, Madam chair. Dave Kuntz, If you can demonstrate something about the unusual nature of the structure that only allows you to go so far and further. Dave Kuntz, redesign that might still create some problem with one of the. Dave Kuntz, dormer. Dave Kuntz, A. Larry Paxton, standards as far as the zoning ordinances concern we're much more likely to be able to accept that as a justification if you just can't get quite all the way. Larry Paxton, I mean you've already shown good faith and trying to make some adjustments, we trust you to see what you can do. Larry Paxton, And you know there's an understanding, then. Larry Paxton, That you've tried to do that. Okay.
SPEAKER_01	and um so we're just we're going to continue this the whole three um items till the next time how are we looking at number um 48 the second one which is the dormer face with
SPEAKER_06	Madam Chair, 48 and 49. All of them. Not 47.
SPEAKER_01	Oh, I'm sorry. I lost my mind here. Okay. Okay. Gotcha. Okay. So is that what you want to do? You want to ask for a continuance?
SPEAKER_10	Yeah, we'll ask for that now. And then we'll go back to brainstorm a bit. Okay.
SPEAKER_01	All right.
SPEAKER_03	But I have a request for you, please. Because of this situation, I'm not able to sell unit two also. If the zoning board would allow me to have the certificate of occupancy for unit two, at least I can put it on the market and sell it while we're working on this one. I would like to make a request of that.
SPEAKER_01	That I don't believe is under our purview. That's Inspectional Services. Kit?
SPEAKER_05	Madam Chair, this is Kit. Yeah, the Zoning Board would not have the authority. It'll have that. No, that would have to be through the Inspectional Services Department. You're right.
SPEAKER_01	Thank you. So even though we feel that 47... is okay right now we'll continue the whole do all the three please and is that what you think that makes sense madam chair right okay good all right so without further ado um could i have the clerk make a motion at the respect of the applicant to continue we need a meeting date madam chair um Kit, where's Madison? This is your case. I don't know if you can work with them a little bit more, tweak this out, make them understand, especially the new architect. He just came on board at the last meeting. He had nothing to do with this in the past. So maybe you can give him some more direction. And so the next meeting is the 17th. We're not having one of the third. Can you guys think you have something put together on the 17th? The applicant, Robert?
SPEAKER_10	Yeah, that's fine as long as that works with the CIPA.
SPEAKER_07	Lauren Harris, um that's fine, I think, also, if the applicant wants anything reviewed by planning or ISD before the meeting, we need to decide on a date that that material needs to be submitted by if it's the 17th I suggest. Lauren Harris, By noon on September 10 for materials.
SPEAKER_00	Okay.
SPEAKER_01	And if you're having a problem with that, communicate with your planner with Ms. Anthony so she can work with you and set up a date instead of us going back and forth, back and forth. I mean, we don't want to waste your time. We don't want to waste our time either. We have to be fruitful. And come back to something that we think is really going to work because we're anxious. Like I said, we want to approve it for you. We want you to get going and get the place rented out. People want looking for apartments. They're looking for stuff. So work on it as best you can. If you need some guidance and stuff, check with Ms. Anthony. And if you're having a problem with the dates, express that to her as well.
SPEAKER_07	Madison Rodman, And I just want to clarify one thing I cannot check compliance for you. I can't perform a proper compliance check that's ISDs purview. So if you're having, if you want a full compliance check before the meeting, I would chat to them.
SPEAKER_01	Robert Monahan, Okay, thank you. Thank you, Madison. Madison Rodman, All right, Robert.
SPEAKER_10	Robert Monahan, Yep, I appreciate the feedback and we'll be hearing back on this.
SPEAKER_11	Okay. Mr. Cook? Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move to approve the request for a continuance to the September 17, 2025 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting in the matter of 8-8-A Melvin Street.
SPEAKER_01	Second. Seconded by Ann Fullerton. All in favor, please say aye. Ann Fullerton? Aye. Brian Cook?
SPEAKER_02	Aye.
SPEAKER_01	Cecilia Deglan? JoAnne Hanrahan, I zack's a rumba. JoAnne Hanrahan, And Susan fontana I let the record show that all Members voting in the all voted in the affirmative to continue until September 17 Thank you Thank you everybody for your patience and I thank you, the architect Robert to. JoAnne Hanrahan, keep on plugging and looking into this. JoAnne Hanrahan, Okay. That's it. There's no other business tonight. Does anybody have anything? You can check off, Mr. There you go. You guys are all set. Thank you. Anybody have any other business tonight they want to speak to or questions? No? Can I have a motion? Oh, so I never closed the public portion of that, by the way. um so for the record i'd like to close the public portion of 8 and 8a melvin street is there anybody else out there kit that's been hanging on nope i think all right and so uh may we have a motion to adjourn
SPEAKER_11	Dave Kuntz, Yes, Madam chair, I moved to adjourn the August 20 2025 meeting of the somerville zoning board of appeals.
SPEAKER_01	Karen Hollweg, I can a. Karen Hollweg, beckoned by a bulletin all in favor zack's remember. Karen Hollweg, CC a daglian. I. Karen Hollweg, And fullerton. Karen Hollweg, I Brian cook. Karen Hollweg, I answers of on Tonto I let the record show we all want to adjourn and go home. Thank you, everyone. Have a good night.
SPEAKER_11	Thank you all.
SPEAKER_01	We have to talk about our clerking the next couple of meetings. Let us know who's volunteering. Thanks, everybody. Have a good one. Thank you. Bye-bye. Have a good night. Thank you, Madison.